Jump to content


Wargaming: Make World of Tanks Historically Accurate Petition


  • Please log in to reply
56 replies to this topic

Fanste94 #21 Posted 18 May 2019 - 08:44 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 4407 battles
  • 548
  • Member since:
    01-13-2013
Yeah everyone shooting with gold ammo and useless tanks and nations that weren't so important in the WW2 (Polish, Czech, Italian, Swedish, French, Japanese and Chinese) and wheeled vehicles are better than the old WoT *facepalm

Edited by Fanste94, 18 May 2019 - 08:45 PM.


Babbet_1 #22 Posted 18 May 2019 - 08:44 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14255 battles
  • 1,116
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    12-13-2015

View PostKanonenVogel19, on 18 May 2019 - 02:37 PM, said:

As an example:

 

- Historical: We add a Tiger with the historically correct gun, armor and engine.

 

So who is going to drive the poor bloody, historically accurate, Sherman or Cromwell, whilst we're all swanning around in our historically accurate, op, Tigers?  :sceptic:

KanonenVogel19 #23 Posted 18 May 2019 - 09:11 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 390 battles
  • 563
  • Member since:
    04-05-2019

View PostBabbet_1, on 18 May 2019 - 08:44 PM, said:

So who is going to drive the poor bloody, historically accurate, Sherman or Cromwell, whilst we're all swanning around in our historically accurate, op, Tigers?

 

The issue with that is that you want to take one realistic part while leaving other cruicial parts out. Tigers were not OP if you consider their production cost. Since we don't have production cost in this game, we need to balance it out by numbers. That means, you can't setup 10 Tigers vs 10 Shermans, and expect it to be balanced. The correct way to balance this is not to buff or nerf, but rather to change the quantity. I don't know the realistic ratios in my head, but let's assume it's somewhere around 1 Tiger for 5 Shermans. So a balanced scenario would something like 5 Tigers against 25 Shermans.



Babbet_1 #24 Posted 18 May 2019 - 09:27 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14255 battles
  • 1,116
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    12-13-2015

View PostKanonenVogel19, on 18 May 2019 - 09:11 PM, said:

 

The issue with that is that you want to take one realistic part while leaving other cruicial parts out. Tigers were not OP if you consider their production cost. Since we don't have production cost in this game, we need to balance it out by numbers. That means, you can't setup 10 Tigers vs 10 Shermans, and expect it to be balanced. The correct way to balance this is not to buff or nerf, but rather to change the quantity. I don't know the realistic ratios in my head, but let's assume it's somewhere around 1 Tiger for 5 Shermans. So a balanced scenario would something like 5 Tigers against 25 Shermans.

 

Unworkable! At least without removing freedom of choice as to which tank you drive, or extending waiting times to a ridiculous level!



KanonenVogel19 #25 Posted 18 May 2019 - 09:53 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 390 battles
  • 563
  • Member since:
    04-05-2019

View PostBabbet_1, on 18 May 2019 - 09:27 PM, said:

Unworkable! At least without removing freedom of choice as to which tank you drive, or extending waiting times to a ridiculous level!

 

It's definitely workable. Maybe not in randoms as we know them today, but in a separate historical game mode, or if they redesigned the game, it would definitely be possible.



Homer_J #26 Posted 18 May 2019 - 10:02 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Moderator
  • 32895 battles
  • 36,107
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostFanste94, on 18 May 2019 - 01:08 PM, said:

Sign this petition if you want to join the fight to make the game historically accurate so that the players besides playing the game can learn something about the history http://chng.it/V77F6CByvm

 

Your last . three . attempts didn't get you anywhere, why do you think this one will?

Edited by Homer_J, 18 May 2019 - 10:03 PM.


Nishi_Kinuyo #27 Posted 19 May 2019 - 12:10 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 9293 battles
  • 6,584
  • [GUP] GUP
  • Member since:
    05-28-2011

View PostHomer_J, on 18 May 2019 - 10:02 PM, said:

 

Your last . three . attempts didn't get you anywhere, why do you think this one will?

Throw enough **** at the wall and some of it might stick?



Only_Slightly_Bent #28 Posted 19 May 2019 - 01:53 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 27083 battles
  • 877
  • [O_S_B] O_S_B
  • Member since:
    11-04-2010

View PostKanonenVogel19, on 18 May 2019 - 08:53 PM, said:

 

It's definitely workable. Maybe not in randoms as we know them today, but in a separate historical game mode, or if they redesigned the game, it would definitely be possible.

WG made a historical battle mode that had weighted tank quantities like you suggest but it failed because no one wanted to play the little tanks



KanonenVogel19 #29 Posted 19 May 2019 - 02:02 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 390 battles
  • 563
  • Member since:
    04-05-2019

View PostOnly_Slightly_Bent, on 19 May 2019 - 01:53 AM, said:

WG made a historical battle mode that had weighted tank quantities like you suggest but it failed because no one wanted to play the little tanks

 

Do you know why no one wanted to play as allies? My guess is that people find Germany more interesting in historical scenarios like that, but that might just be my biased opinion :P

 



Only_Slightly_Bent #30 Posted 19 May 2019 - 02:55 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Beta Tester
  • 27083 battles
  • 877
  • [O_S_B] O_S_B
  • Member since:
    11-04-2010
It wasn't just the Allies, people didn't want to play the smaller tanks on the German side either, only the Tiger and Panther.

KanonenVogel19 #31 Posted 19 May 2019 - 03:19 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 390 battles
  • 563
  • Member since:
    04-05-2019

View PostOnly_Slightly_Bent, on 19 May 2019 - 02:55 AM, said:

It wasn't just the Allies, people didn't want to play the smaller tanks on the German side either, only the Tiger and Panther.

 

Hmm, I see. It's difficult for me to suggest a solution to it when I don't know the reason to this problem. I wasn't playing this game when this historical mode was aviable, so I don't know. But I'm pretty sure that they could get it to work if they kept working on it rather than just removing it.



Jigabachi #32 Posted 19 May 2019 - 07:40 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 17948 battles
  • 21,021
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-12-2011

View PostFanste94, on 18 May 2019 - 04:55 PM, said:

The maps need to be changed to be simple as they were

What does that mean? We need details.

 

Block Quote

and the music and UI also need to be changed to a more mid 20th century army style

How did the User Intergaces look back then?

What's the problem with the music?

 

Block Quote

and also the tanks need to be rebalanced

How? Show some examples.

 

Block Quote

and the gold ammo needs to be removed it's overused and it's ruining the game

That's finally a good idea, but that only works when you properly balance the rest of the game, so what's your approach?

 

Long story short: I still doubt that you have any idea what you are talking about here or that you bothered to put any thought into your brainfarts before spamming them again and again. If you want to be taken any seriously, you finally need to talk sense and to come up with details. That might require writing a few posts that are longer than a single line.

 

 

 


Edited by Jigabachi, 19 May 2019 - 10:18 AM.


Bordhaw #33 Posted 19 May 2019 - 09:07 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 15287 battles
  • 5,206
  • Member since:
    01-29-2017

View PostFanste94, on 18 May 2019 - 07:44 PM, said:

Yeah everyone shooting with gold ammo and useless tanks and nations that weren't so important in the WW2 (Polish, Czech, Italian, Swedish, French, Japanese and Chinese) and wheeled vehicles are better than the old WoT *facepalm

 



Homer_J #34 Posted 19 May 2019 - 12:29 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Moderator
  • 32895 battles
  • 36,107
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostKanonenVogel19, on 19 May 2019 - 02:02 AM, said:

 

Do you know why no one wanted to play as allies? My guess is that people find Germany more interesting in historical scenarios like that, but that might just be my biased opinion :P

 

 

Nobody wanted to play SU-85B or PzIII in the battle of Kursk, they wanted to be an SU-152 or Tiger.

 

The other battles followed the same vein, so you ended up with massive queues of people wanting to play the best tanks.  And they limited premium ammo so people would shoot the few premium shells they had then just drive into the big guns so they could leave.

 

Fact is that real war isn't fair or balanced, or as it turns out, fun.



SiliconSidewinder #35 Posted 19 May 2019 - 12:42 PM

    General

  • Player
  • 29102 battles
  • 8,668
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-16-2012

View PostHomer_J, on 19 May 2019 - 12:29 PM, said:

 

Nobody wanted to play SU-85B or PzIII in the battle of Kursk, they wanted to be an SU-152 or Tiger.

 

The other battles followed the same vein, so you ended up with massive queues of people wanting to play the best tanks.  And they limited premium ammo so people would shoot the few premium shells they had then just drive into the big guns so they could leave.

 

Fact is that real war isn't fair or balanced, or as it turns out, fun.

 

 

I am playing some "historical" scenarios in WoT with some friends from time to time.

let's just say that on a tanks only basis these are extremly onesided.

for example in the comeing one I'll be sitting in a historical equiped Grant and will have up to three tiger 131s on the enemy team.

obvioulsy there will be some shermans and wolverines as well but with historical guns.

 

I excpect the british army to be utterly slaughtered and we'll be doing a fancy vicorty dance if we can kill just one of the tigers :P

 

(in the one before we played a push for stalingrade and I was on the german side and... yeah we got to stalingrade but we couldn't even get one break against the t 34 horde in the final battle )


Edited by SiliconSidewinder, 19 May 2019 - 12:44 PM.


KanonenVogel19 #36 Posted 19 May 2019 - 03:47 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 390 battles
  • 563
  • Member since:
    04-05-2019

View PostHomer_J, on 19 May 2019 - 12:29 PM, said:

Nobody wanted to play SU-85B or PzIII in the battle of Kursk, they wanted to be an SU-152 or Tiger.

 

As I wrote, it's difficult for me to suggest a solution to the problem when I don't know the exact cause to the problem.

 

All I can do now is just to guess. For example, how did they design the "less attractive" tanks? They can't use the system that they currently have in randoms where the goal of every single tank is just to farm damage. Light vehicles usually have the role of spotting, and they should be good at that, and it should be rewarding to spot. Same goes for cheaper TDs and MTs.

 

View PostHomer_J, on 19 May 2019 - 12:29 PM, said:

And they limited premium ammo so people would shoot the few premium shells they had then just drive into the big guns so they could leave.

 

That's another mistake. They shouldn't have any premium ammo in a historical game mode. The tanks can have ammunition types like APCR and HEAT, but in real life those ammunition types have clear disadvantages aswell, compared to the game where they're almost strightout better.

 

View PostHomer_J, on 19 May 2019 - 12:29 PM, said:

Fact is that real war isn't fair or balanced, or as it turns out, fun.

 

I don't agree with this though :P

 

The real world is very balanced, atleast from a physical and economical point of view. For example, it's impossible to strap on massive amounts of armor on a tank that is small and thus have a small engine, and still make it go above 50 km/h. Same applies high quality tanks, while they might be good individually, they will be very expensive. Just having a search on google which nation that has the best fighter jets and notice that no one can give a clear unbiased answer should be enough proof of that.

 

The way counters work in real life in another proof of balance. The aircraft got invented, so did the anti-aircraft gun. The submarine got invented, so did depth charges. Shermans could not pierce the Tiger, so they changed it into a Sherman Firefly. And so on.

 

War might not be fun in regards to people getting killed etc. But war is interesting from a strategic and cinematic point of view. And I think that's why so many people are interested in games that are in one way or another connected to war. After all, one of the purposes of most games are to put the player into an experience that's out of reach in the real world. The more realistic the game is, the more realistic the experience becomes. Then of course it can't be overly complicated either, as that ruins the fun aspect.

14:54 Added after 7 minutes

View PostSiliconSidewinder, on 19 May 2019 - 12:42 PM, said:

I excpect the british army to be utterly slaughtered and we'll be doing a fancy vicorty dance if we can kill just one of the tigers :P

 

But there is a lot of assets missing from that scenario to make it truly historical, and that's also propably what makes it so unbalanced.

 

You mentioned 3 Tigers, but how many tanks did the allies have?

What happened to the rest of the German division, namely all the Pz.IVs, StuGs, etc?

Where are the Sherman Fireflies?

Why didn't you get any support from American Thunderbolts?

 

As you see, WG can't implement a historical game mode when all these important things are missing :P



Homer_J #37 Posted 19 May 2019 - 04:44 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Moderator
  • 32895 battles
  • 36,107
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostKanonenVogel19, on 19 May 2019 - 03:47 PM, said:

 

All I can do now is just to guess. For example, how did they design the "less attractive" tanks? They can't use the system that they currently have in randoms where the goal of every single tank is just to farm damage. Light vehicles usually have the role of spotting, and they should be good at that, and it should be rewarding to spot. Same goes for cheaper TDs and MTs.

 

 

They had a mix of tanks available, all downgraded to historical setup, so no long 88 on the Tiger for instance.  Each would have a weight and the team would have a maximum total weight available.  Gameplay was otherwise standard random mode.

 

So a Tiger would be worth maybe five PzIII but it didn't matter because nobody would queue with the PzIII so the team would be just Tigers, so nobody was going to be an SU-85B with historical gun on the Russian team, they would all be SU-152 (or was it ISU-152) with the stock 152mm gun.  The queue time was horrendous and the battles boring and predictable.

 

Look it up on Youtube.  Turns out it's even worse than I remember.  You could drive a PzII or a T-70 in Kursk. And it was SU-76 not 85B.

 

The best, most balanced one was Ardennes offensive where you could take your historical M10 up against a Tiger II.


Edited by Homer_J, 19 May 2019 - 04:51 PM.


KanonenVogel19 #38 Posted 19 May 2019 - 05:04 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 390 battles
  • 563
  • Member since:
    04-05-2019

View PostHomer_J, on 19 May 2019 - 04:44 PM, said:

but it didn't matter because nobody would queue with the PzIII

 

But do you remember why no one wanted to queue up with tanks like the Pz.III or Sherman? :)



Homer_J #39 Posted 19 May 2019 - 05:47 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Moderator
  • 32895 battles
  • 36,107
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    09-03-2010

View PostKanonenVogel19, on 19 May 2019 - 05:04 PM, said:

 

But do you remember why no one wanted to queue up with tanks like the Pz.III or Sherman? :)

 

Human nature.  Nobody wants to be the cannon fodder.

 

Just watch the youtube videos, that quickythingy guy has a great one with the JagdTiger vs a bunch of IS.



KanonenVogel19 #40 Posted 19 May 2019 - 06:37 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 390 battles
  • 563
  • Member since:
    04-05-2019

View PostHomer_J, on 19 May 2019 - 05:47 PM, said:

Human nature.  Nobody wants to be the cannon fodder.

 

I understand. In that case, I think WGs main design error was to make some of the tanks appear as cannon fodder. For example, while cheap recon tanks could not even compare to the armor and firepower of a Tiger, they where much more suited for spotting duties thanks to their small size and mobility compared to a Tiger. Same thing with the cheaper tank destroyers. While not having guns powerful enough to garantee a frontal penetration of a Tiger, they would have very good rate of fire due to the lower caliber and good concealment due to the smaller size.

 

All in all, I think this boils down to core design problems in WoT. For example, all tanks being balanced towards being damage dealers rather than some being pure spotters. Or, all tanks having enough view range to spot for themselves rather than having to depend on dedicated recon tanks. Or, almost all maps favouring close quarters brawls rather than focusing on strategic positioning, concealment, sniping etc.

 

Have you tried out Steel Division? The way recon units interact with other units is just amazing in that game.

 

View PostHomer_J, on 19 May 2019 - 05:47 PM, said:

Just watch the youtube videos, that quickythingy guy has a great one with the JagdTiger vs a bunch of IS.

 

I'll watch it :great:






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users